Choice in retention programs is linked to retention gains, but autonomy is rarely a tested variable¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study (2 entries) · review r2 · q2
Currency · newest study 2020 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person
Evidence quality · No study behind this claim is a peer-reviewed article with a DOI: it rests on a source with no registered publication record (a web page, book or unpublished report). It is kept because 3 design pages cite it; treat it as a lead to check, not an established finding.

Subclaims¶

q2 i? The review reports that the one learning-community study with random, no-choice assignment showed no persistence or achievement gains, while voluntary programs showed some gains, suggesting choice itself may act as a mediator. → Zak-Moskal 2020 q2 i? The review reports that autonomy has no clear parallel in current retention programs and appears as a discernable but untested feature of program designs. → Zak-Moskal 2020 (2)

Evidence¶

Zak-Moskal 2020¶

Zak-Moskal, A. D., & Garrison, M. J. (2020). Can Self-determination Theory be Used to Increase College Student Retention?. The New York Journal of Student Affairs, 20(1). https://commons.library.stonybrook.edu/nyjsa/vol20/iss1/4

q2 · i? · review · r2

Narrative review attributing this to Andrade's (2007) review of 12 learning-community studies. The randomly assigned study showed no "gains in either persistence or academic achievement" despite strong satisfaction ratings; voluntary-participation studies showed at least some retention gains. No effect size printed.

"The one study that selected LC participants randomly (i.e., offered no choice) did not demonstrate "gains in either persistence or academic achievement although participants gave it strong reviews for involvement and satisfaction""

Zak-Moskal 2020 (2)¶

Zak-Moskal, A. D., & Garrison, M. J. (2020). Can Self-determination Theory be Used to Increase College Student Retention?. The New York Journal of Student Affairs, 20(1). https://commons.library.stonybrook.edu/nyjsa/vol20/iss1/4

q2 · i? · review · r2

The review's own synthesis of Table 1, which codes 12 studies by which needs each met. The authors state the need for autonomy "has no clear parallel in current retention programs" and that degree of choice "did not appear as a conscious or tested variable".

"It is the first psychological need in SDT (the need for autonomy) that has no clear parallel in current retention programs. Table 1 indicates the relative lack of emphasis on autonomy in current retention research."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Not all students in connectivist courses could autonomously direct their own learning, and some felt disconnected and demotivated — the general claim this finding bears on, with the studies behind it
• Retention programs interpreted as meeting all three SDT needs show higher persistence and standing — related
• Interest/enjoyment and perceived choice were the weakest motivation dimensions, suggesting Mangomon's RPG mechanics did not yet fully serve learner autonomy — related
• Student choice is rare in authentic assessment designs while assigned, sometimes graded, self-reflection is more common — related
• In Pilot District 3, majorities of students agreed that Compact Writing Assignments gave them topic choice and that autonomy and varied expression formats improved engagement and writing quality — related
• Students taught with the Self-Determined Learning Model of Instruction gain in self-determination, but not significantly more than a delayed-treatment control group — related